Elaris BEO vs Mazda CX-6e

Biggest differences: DC charging — Elaris BEO 100 kW, Mazda CX-6e 195 kW · Boot — Elaris BEO 467 l, Mazda CX-6e 363 l · Power — Elaris BEO 204 PS, Mazda CX-6e 258 PS.

Elaris BEO

The Elaris BEO is an SUV in the D segment, offering front-wheel drive and a WLTP range of 489 km.

Mazda CX-6e

The Mazda CX-6e is a D-segment SUV with rear-wheel drive, offering a range of 484 km in the WLTP cycle and fast DC charging capabilities.

Profile against the market: Elaris BEO vs Mazda CX-6e

WLTP rangeBatteryPowerDC charging0–100 km/h

Elaris BEO or Mazda CX-6e — who wins where

It's a tie: 4 to 4

The score leaves out metrics where data is missing on one side.

Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.

  • WLTP range kmElaris BEO +5 km
    Elaris BEO
    489
    Mazda CX-6e
    484
  • Battery kWhElaris BEO +8 kWh
    Elaris BEO
    86
    Mazda CX-6e
    78
  • Consumption kWh/100 kmMazda CX-6e −0.4 kWh/100 km
    Elaris BEO
    19.3
    Mazda CX-6e
    18.9
  • Power PSMazda CX-6e +54 PS
    Elaris BEO
    204
    Mazda CX-6e
    258
  • 0–100 km/h sNo data
    Elaris BEO
    Mazda CX-6e
    7.9
  • Top speed km/hMazda CX-6e +35 km/h
    Elaris BEO
    150
    Mazda CX-6e
    185
  • DC charging kWMazda CX-6e +95 kW
    Elaris BEO
    100
    Mazda CX-6e
    195
  • AC charging kWNo difference
    Elaris BEO
    11
    Mazda CX-6e
    11
  • Weight kgElaris BEO −175 kg
    Elaris BEO
    1955
    Mazda CX-6e
    2130
  • Boot lElaris BEO +104 l
    Elaris BEO
    467
    Mazda CX-6e
    363

Add a third car

Technical data: Elaris BEO vs Mazda CX-6e

Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data

Technical data: Elaris BEO vs Mazda CX-6e
Key parameters Elaris BEO
Standard
Mazda CX-6e
Takumi
Difference
Range and energy
WLTP range489 km484 kmElaris +5 km
Battery86 kWh78 kWhElaris +8 kWh
Consumption19.3 kWh/100 km18.9 kWh/100 kmMazda −0.4 kWh/100 km
Charging
DC charging100 kW195 kWMazda +95 kW
AC charging11 kW11 kWNo difference
Charging 45 min 20–80%24 min 10–80%21 min
Range per minute of charging6.5 km/min14.1 km/minMazda +7.6 km/min
Voltage400 V
Performance and drivetrain
Power204 PS258 PSMazda +54 PS
0–100 km/h7.9 s
Top speed150 km/h185 km/hMazda +35 km/h
DrivetrainFWDRWDdifferent type
Practicality
Weight1955 kg2130 kgElaris −175 kg
Boot467 l363 lElaris +104 l
V2L (external power)NoYesonly Mazda
Length4698 mm4850 mmMazda +152 mm
Width1908 mm1935 mmMazda +27 mm
Height1696 mm1620 mmElaris +76 mm
Wheelbase2800 mm2902 mmMazda +102 mm

The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.

Energy cost calculator

Elaris BEO

Cost per 100 km5.79
Monthly72
Yearly869

Mazda CX-6e

Cost per 100 km5.67
Monthly71
Yearly850

Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.

Video reviews of both models

Elaris BEO

Mazda CX-6e

Other comparisons in this class: SUV, segment D

Frequently asked questions about this comparison

How do the drivetrains of the Elaris BEO and the Mazda CX-6e differ?

The Elaris BEO has FWD and 204 PS. The Mazda CX-6e has RWD and 258 PS.

Which one can power appliances from a socket (V2L)?

Only the Mazda CX-6e — its 78 kWh battery then works as a power source. The Elaris BEO, with 86 kWh, does not offer it.

Which has the bigger boot?

The Elaris BEO takes more: 467 l against 363 l in the Mazda CX-6e. The difference is 104 l.

Which charges faster?

The Elaris BEO accepts up to 100 kW DC, the Mazda CX-6e up to 195 kW.

Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer

Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.